Search age:

Search in:

Heart full of pride at sight of veil

My godless heart leaps with joy when I see brave, veiled Muslim women walking in Australian streets. My soul sings at this sight.

Hang on a second, what is happening here? What in the hell is an atheistic, pro feminist Jew doing praising the veil that adorns the head and sometimes face of Muslim women? Holy hypocritical misogyny , Batman! Over the next two weeks, I want to explore this issue from two angles. Today I look at my Ozzie view on the role of love and hatred. Next week I will have a look at some of the overseas experience.My rejoicing at the voluntary veiling by Muslim women is primarily driven by my love of difference. Of course I have views about atheism, feminism and social cohesion which could be mustered to promote a critique of the veil. But all these are subservient to my untrammelled wish to live in a tolerant community dappled by difference be it divergence in dress, custom, belief and whatever. In my youth I came from an ethnic tribe that defined discrepancy in appearance, gastronomy and day of sabbatical worship. These days of course my tribe is pretty ordinary in the Australian setting but in my formative years, difference marked us out and anti Semitic taunts emphasised our divergence from the norm. So I’ll be buggered if I now easily bow to the notion that any cultural expression is anything but glorious.I understand the critique of feminine headdress. Where there is a gender based difference it inevitably operates to the disadvantage of women. Where religions, Western or Eastern, involve themselves in gender or sexual matters, they inevitably make a sexually repressive hash of it. All that is conceded but lesser than the need to ensure our community embraces all. There are of course boundaries. But wearing a veil is not female circumcision which needless to say, I do condemn. It is merely a symbol. It is a strong symbol of Islamic consciousness but lawful and desirable in Australia. Let me illustrate with a true story. Alfred (not his real name) is a Malaysian born academic. He is modern, educated and a secular Muslim. The source of his world, his mother, eschews head covering with deliberation. His wife, Carol was similar and wore no head wear. Unfortunately, Alfred and Carol were living and working in the USA on 9/11. In the Islam phobic days that followed, life for Muslims, both devout and not, became intolerable. Islam and its people were demonised by the media and politicians. Governmental arrangements were altered. I understand why that happened but put yourself in Alfred’s and Carol’s position. A tiny minority of suicidal members of your faith commit an atrocity that you believe is ridiculous and then your tribe is singled out for vilification. And so Alfred and Carol found themselves in a very stigmatised place. In the face of this detestation, what was Carol’s first inclination? She adopted the veil. Hatred calls forth resistance. Resistance calls forth identification with the tribe. Tribes, particularly religious tribes, express themselves through vestments. This is a universal and ageless cycle.So two generations of modernisation and secularisation had been (partially) undone. The atmosphere of religious repression had turned back Alfred’s and Carol’s clocks and she is veiled. So my strongest advice to those who despise the veil is this – repression is counterproductive. If you really cannot handle the veil, then battle it with love (agape ). Repudiate it with understanding. Destroy it with tolerance or risk fanning adoration of the veil with the fires of prejudice. This I know from personal experience.About thirty years ago, I was walking to synagogue on Yom Kippur with my yarmulke on my noggin. This was a tentative and cautious decision. Tentative because in those days of conformity and assimilation, I considered myself too much of a groovy faux Anglo to wear a badge of tribal identification. But that day I did. No sooner did I appear on the street when a pack of hoons drove past and one yelled words to the effect of, “Hey Jew boy, go back to your own fucking country.” It is interesting that just a couple of decades after the Holocaust, this yob thought that anti-Semitism was still kosher and cool. Ah, bigotry it’s just so enduring. Anyway, what was my reaction? I wore that yarmulke all day. I walked around the streets as if tempting another car full of bigots to confront me. It was an epiphany. I live and have lived a safe, secure and comfortable life with only tiny insights into oppression. Those intimations though have taught me this. Oppression is awful and the human reaction is insurgence and closer identification with the tribe. Every self respecting religion was born in the womb of subjugation. All of the big faiths have their tales of martyrdom, holy wars and repression. Tyranny is a necessary ingredient for religion and religions then cleverly craft this tyranny into notions of redemption, sacrifice, salvation and tribal loyalty. So Western antagonism is just fuel on the fire for conservative branches of Islam. Don’t condemn the veil and give succour to the conservatives. Welcome the veil. Embrace our difference. Love our diversity.

Advertisement

30 comments so far

Well said Mark. I imagine it would not go down well if I was to walk around with a tee shirt which says "All women are whores!"

To me that's no different from women who wear scarfs which say "All men are rapists!

Commenter

Neilgue

Date and time

October 19, 2009, 11:51AM

So if we were to adhere to a giggling praise of "difference" we should support the wearing of the swastika, maybe proudly wear T-shirts of "I hate fags", abandon all forms of protection against vilification and discrimination. The list is endless, and all protected by the absolute of "difference". "Difference" is meaningless. Its just the jingoism of the liberal moron too busy shopping their mind away, too busy to actually think about anything. It isnt "difference" that is the issue, its the meaning behind what is different. What is the veil? What is its origin? What is it saying within a very particular social/religious/ political context? The veil says something loud and clear and it is on that basis that it should be accepted or rejected, not on the empty criteria of "difference".

DICK HERE: Mark, it is always dangerous to argue by analogy. We end up arguing about the appropriateness of the analogy. I think that religions are distinct from hate groups constituted to demonize others. At times of course, during an ethnic battle fueled by religious affiliation, the distinction becomes a bit blurred. But generally, I believe the distinction between hate groups and faith is so profound that your arguments lack power and relevance. I also must assure you that my adoration of cultural difference is not just the mealy mouthed repetition of liberal dogma. I genuinely appreciate difference in a deep and visceral way. I travel to observe it and I rejoice when I see it in my local community. Dick

Commenter

Mark

Date and time

October 19, 2009, 12:20PM

I agree with much of what you say, being equally an apostate, but I think you are missing the point of why people react more negatively to some identity costumes than to others. It's the "holier than thou" implication of dog-collars, wimples, head-scarves and yarmulkas that bothers your average secular aussie. When your costume is a claim that you are closer to God, or belong to his favoured group out of all humanity throughout history, then the reaction is likely to be "bullshit!" whether expressed or suppressed.
Identity costumes like national dress, hippy gear, class distinction outfits (eg blue shirt, moleskins, riding boots), Goth outfits etc are less provocative because they don't carry the baggage of claims of specialness in the sight of God.
Your friends in USA may have been making a political statement but the expression was, in fact, religious and an act of assertiveness that was intended to provoke reaction from reactionaries.
BTW my life partner is Muslim but unveiled, and finds the veil vogue insincere and insulting to modern Islam.

Commenter

Solomon

Date and time

October 19, 2009, 12:45PM

Neilgue, the veil isn't saying 'all men are rapists', it's about modesty and wanting to be closer to God. Mark, what is the veil saying and have you asked Muslim women why they wear it?

Commenter

Dan

Date and time

October 19, 2009, 4:13PM

Dick, you may want to rethink wearing a yarmulke in the not too distant future if the Islamic population here continues to grow, or another war breaks out near Israel/Gaza/Lebanon.

Do you realise what is happening to Jews in traditional areas of residence in London's east end and Paris? Difference is OK as long as it doesn't threaten and persecute you.

In the past it was Christians, now it is Muslims.

Commenter

Paul

Location

Sydney

Date and time

October 19, 2009, 5:24PM

Paul, I don't think that a growing Islamic population will be a problem. Afterall, Muslims are not responsible for hardly any anti-Semitic violence here in Australia. 'Christians' are.

Commenter

Dan

Date and time

October 19, 2009, 6:11PM

Mark... You're comparing the veil with a swastika?! Get real. The veil represents to you something it certainly does not represent to the women wearing it in Australia.
Solomon... Don't think that way and you'll be right. Where do you guys get these ideas from? Let me guess, the TV and internet? Have you actually tried a little thing called 'tolerance'?
So someone cannot wear a headscarf without some cretin thinking that it 'symbolises' he's a rapist? Grow up.

Commenter

Ish

Location

Melbourne

Date and time

October 20, 2009, 7:29AM

I'm not a muslim woman, but I imagine that the veil has it's own personal significance to each individual woman who wears it, including modesty and wanting to feel closer to their God. Personally, I don't have a problem with the veil, if a woman wears it by choice, instead of being bullied into wearing it.
In fact, I can see how the choice to wear it can be a feminist choice - it removes the ability of others to judge the woman by her perceived beauty (or lack of).

Having said that, it's funny how the most vocal opponents of the veil are white anglo males. Wonder why?

It's also funny how many of the above-mentioned males tend to overlook the other things happening in our modern western society that oppress women - such as the widening of the gender wage gap, and that childcare is still considered to be a "women's" issue are just 2 which come to mind.

Men, if you want to defend "women's rights", don't focus on the veil, it just makes you look like hypocrites.

Commenter

Nicole

Location

The 'Gong

Date and time

October 20, 2009, 9:57AM

The veil tells the world that muslim men are uncivilised animals who cannot control themselves. This is an insult to men, and women suffer the consequences.
My partner is eqyptian muslim, and i will not veil as it insults him as much as me. 30 yrs ago hardly any women in the ME covered, now religious fundamentalism makes them. It is a backwards step for muslims and should not be tolerated except in a religious setting.

Commenter

nessa

Date and time

October 20, 2009, 4:59PM

@ Nicole,

you construct a complete straw man in your construct of white anglo males' focus upon 'the veil'. As if your caricature of male automatically excludes them from the issue. Your construct drips with all sorts of innuendo. A few hangups that you need to sort there.

The veil of course is just one of the more obvious expressions of repression (but often in true Orwellian style proclaimed by Islamic adherents as a liberation). There are many other incidences which should too be criticised.And they are. Believe it or not Nicole a person can criticise the veil AND be active in addressing other manifestations of discrimination too.

Women generally have to suffer the imposition upon them of how men want them to dress and to look. But the veil is different in that it A. claims the lie of weird sacred sanction, B. insults men by making them into universally uncontrollable animals so women need to be covered against their lust filled gaze, C. makes women into the problem because it is THEY who need to cover in so modest a way so to not provoke male desire,D. enforces a subservience both to men and to God in that ONLY they cover, as if men too should not cover before their God, or cover so to ward off the desire of women or of other men.

Subscribe to IT Pro

Editor's Choice

Prime Minister Tony Abbott has bolstered Malcolm Turnbull's ministerial duties, handing him greater responsibility for e-government in a push to expand the use of a single digital identity for Australians.

Data

The new roof that spans Margaret Court arena does more than keep out the weather. Built into the gantries that surround the sliding ceiling are Wi-Fi antennas that beam web access to every ticket holder.